The statistic used on that map was the percentage of the total population who had received a college degree, as a proxy for economic status. The higher the percentage, the more economically developed and the more likely the population was to be educated.
I've been looking at the map of countries in the world. The world map has a few interesting features. Some of the countries are so tiny it is hard to tell which country they represent, which can be solved by zooming in to the relevant country.
Next, there are some larger countries, such as Russia, China, Japan and the like, which have interesting shapes.
And then, there are countries, such as South Africa, which are so unusual, such as Africa's shape or Australia, which would be called "twisted".
Australia's oddity, the Southern Hemisphere, has an interesting effect on the continents.
Then there is Africa. Now, to a Westerner, Africa looks very "flat" and "sparse", with a few large "islands", such as the North African coast, and some larger land mass, such as the Sudan.
But the African continent is not actually flat, or sparse. It is, on the contrary, densely packed with a few large landmasses, and very dense population. It is the landmasses that make Africa look flat. And Africa, in the Southern Hemisphere, is "concave", instead of "convex".
It's also interesting to see that there are only very few islands of land, apart from Madagascar and, I suppose, Mauritius, in Africa.
South Africa is a very unusual landmass for a country. It is quite large, at about the size of Western Europe, but there is a lot of it and it has a strange shape. In the Northern Hemisphere, it would be called "tortuous".
The point I made in my previous post is that people who have an educational background tend to have higher economic status.
This is because those with a college degree have a higher education level, and that education and economic wealth go together. This has a number of implications for public policy.
